Center Square News

(The Center Square) - Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs’ office is opposing a bill that seeks to prevent the distribution of child pornography and revenge porn, according to state Rep. Nick Kupper, R-Yuma, sponsor of House Bill 2133.

The Center Square reached out to the Democratic governor for comment, but Hobbs and her staff did not respond before press time despite multiple requests this week for comment.

Kupper told The Center Square that he anticipates House Democrats who originally supported his bill in the state House will switch their votes when representatives vote on the amended version on Monday.

He added he thinks Hobbs will veto the bill and has been trying to persuade Democrats to reject his legislation so the governor can “argue it’s a partisan bill.”

“ I think she's afraid of what it looks like to veto a bill that protects children from being in porn and protects nonconsensual adults from being in porn against their will,” he said. “[Hobbs] or her people think that if they can label it as a partisan bill that's anti-free speech, they can justify going against it.”

Kupper said the bill does not violate free speech, noting child pornography and revenge porn are not protected speech.

HB 2133, also known as the Protect Act, requires online commercial websites that publish or distribute sexual materials to receive age verification and consent from everyone involved in the material.

The bill also requires commercial websites to use reasonable measures to stop the uploading of unverified sexual material, such as automated detection tools.

Arizona’s state House passed the bill 41 to 16, with nine Democrats voting with Republicans in favor of the bill in February. The state Senate passed the amended bill 16-12 along party lines.

Kupper told The Center Square this week that when the bill went to the Senate Judiciary Committee, numerous concerns were raised, including that it would block satire and impede record-keeping.

He said he amended his bill to address these concerns.

The Senate’s amended version of HB 2133 included a provision that says the law would not apply to digitally manipulated images or to images that are for parody, comedy, artistic expression or public criticism.

Furthermore, the amended bill included a new provision for content created before 1988, which does not need to undergo the verification process. The reason this year was chosen is that it was when the federal government passed a law requiring the adult content industry to begin keeping records of age and consent.

HB 2133 also now allows for data to be shared with federal, state and local governments.

While Kupper was working on changes to his billl, he said someone from the governor's office reached out to him and started a conversation about the bill. He said the only concern raised was about the satire clause.

Kupper said he sent the governor’s office the added language that exempted satire.

A few days later, the state representative said Hobbs’ office got back to him, saying the added language to his bill did not fully address the office's concern.

Kupper said he asked the governor’s office to send him the language it wants added to the bill.

The governor’s office ended up sending him a strike-everything amendment that removed “every single word of [his] bill except for the title,” according to Kupper.

“They wrote a completely different bill that did not do at all what my bill did,” he said.

The state representative said he told the person from Hobbs' office that he worked with Meta, Google and the Free Speech Coalition on the bill. He added that it had a supermajority of votes in the state House.

The woman who approached Kupper about running this bill said she was a victim of revenge porn.

Uldouz Wallace, an actress, said she was a victim of the 2014 iCloud hack/leak, where she and more than 100 other celebrities, including Jennifer Lawrence, Kate Upton and Selena Gomez, had private images leaked online by hackers.

Wallace told The Center Square that after this occurred, it “basically destroyed every part of [her] life.”

Wallace said the hacker leaked private photos of her, which caused her “whole world” to come “crumbling down.”

“Throughout that time, I experienced severe bullying, harassment, gang stalking and targeting, Wallace said.

The actress added that a lot of the “bullying and harassing” came from other actresses and influencers.

After her photos were leaked, Wallace said she remained silent for eight years.

During this time, she said she asked adult websites to take down her nonconsensual content.

According to Wallace, she spent millions of her own dollars attempting to have these websites take down the items.

“I didn’t see any results from it; it was a bottomless pit, and it was never-ending. I was just wondering why nobody has done anything about this,” she said.

Wallace told The Center Square that she quickly realized how much time was wasted attempting to take down these images, along with how much money and effort it took to remove the content from websites.

She questioned why it was up to the “survivors” to have to take down all this content when “it should not have happened in the first place.”

Wallace said she decided to share her story with the public and also try to change the law.

She said she worked with federal lawmakers to come up with a federal bill to require platforms that host pornography to obtain verified consent from people uploading content or appearing in the content. It would also require these websites to remove nonconsensual images from their platforms.

Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah, introduced the Protect Act of 2024. The bill was read twice on the Senate floor and referred to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary. Lee’s bill never made it to the Senate floor for a vote.

Wallace also started a nonprofit called Foundation Ra, which “supports children, women and men that are victims of online image-based sexual abuse,” according to its website.

At the state level, she has had the Protect Act introduced in California, Massachusetts, South Carolina and in the United Kingdom.

Wallace also had the Protect Act introduced in the United Kingdom, where the House of Lords passed Amendment 300 last week.

The actress also said she is working with the United Nations, Canada, the European Union and the African Union.

“The real solution is prevention,” she said.

Wallace called Kupper's HB 2133 an “easy common sense bill” because these online platforms already have the technology to prevent nonconsensual content from getting uploaded.

(The Center Square) – Membership is down for what has been described as one of California’s most aggressive labor unions.

Los Angeles area-based Unite Here Local 11 saw its membership drop by over 4% in 2025, according to the Center for Union Facts, an organization that studies unions. Overall, Unite Here Local 11's membership is down nearly 30% in the past three years, the center reported after checking the union's filings with the U.S. Department of Labor.

The union local says on its website that it represents over 32,000 workers employed in hotels, restaurants, airports, arenas and convention centers throughout Southern California and Arizona.

Charlyce Bozzello, communications director at the Center for Union Facts, said her organization, which considers Unite Here Local 11 to be one of the most aggressive unions, has been looking at the situation for years.

“We have talked about the allegations of discrimination which have been made against one of the union's leaders, Ada Briceño, and there's a bunch of other controversies as well,” Bozzello told The Center Square. “Two of the other union leaders, Susan Minato and Kurt Petersen, have family members who have been on the union payroll for a few years now.”

The Center Square tried on several occasions to reach Unite Here Local 11 by email and phone. The Center Square never received a response.

“Every year we look at the union's financial filings with the Department of Labor,” said Bozzello, whose organization is a 501c3 nonprofit dedicated to transparency and accountability in the labor movement. “Most unions have to submit these. We kind of look through [them], and we've seen this trend with Local 11, where their membership is declining. And yet the amount of dues that they're charging people has been going up amid this affordability crisis.”

According to Bozzello, this also occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Center for Union Facts said it was made aware of this after a union whistleblower reached out to say that the union was pressuring the whistleblower to continue paying dues despite being out of work while hotels were closed because of the pandemic.

“Dues are going up, and the salaries for the union leaders continue to go up as well,” said Bozzello. “Every single year, they've seen their pay increase.”

The Center Square presented these claims from Center for Union Facts to Unite Here Local 11. Again, no response was given by phone or email.

Center for Union Facts now claims to have received an anonymous letter from a group claiming to be community leaders, elected officials and labor leaders in the community who are calling out the union and referencing research from Center for Union Facts.

“It was good to see that the union was actually being put under scrutiny by these types of people in the community,” said Bozzello. “It looks like they just want answers on what’s happening at Local 11 and what's happening with the leadership.”

Bozzello said this ought to cause people outside of Los Angeles to pay attention.

Even if someone is not in California, Bozzello said the union is pushing “very controversial policies” that are “hurting the workers that they're meant to represent.”

For example, Bozzello pointed to a $30 minimum wage for the hospitality industry in Los Angeles. The city-approved wage is being phased in and will be up to $30 in July 2028.

“It's already causing job losses,” said Bozzello. “I think the latest is that 6% of jobs in that industry have been lost. And it's not even fully - the wage rate isn't even fully implemented yet. It's meant to go into effect right when the Olympics get to town.”

Los Angeles is hosting the Summer Olympics in 2028.

Tickets are already on sale, and people are looking at hotels to stay at while in the city for the games.

“Hotels in the area are already saying like, ‘We are backing out of room blocks’ because of all of these estimated hikes in labor costs from this $30 minimum wage,” said Bozzello. “I think that if LA kind of blows hosting the Olympics and the union contributes to that, that's a nationally interesting story.”

(The Center Square) - A new semiconductor supply chain facility is coming to Chandler, a city near Phoenix.

The city of Chandler announced that TOCALO, a Japanese-based company, will be opening a 30,245-square-foot facility.

The new facility will be TOCALO’s second in America, with the first one being in La Palma in Southern California's Orange County.

TOCALO makes coating technologies that support critical processes within the semiconductor manufacturing supply chain.

Yasuki Nakahira, TOCALO’s vice president of global business development headquarters, said the company “found Chandler’s environment and property to be perfectly aligned with our operational vision.”

Chandler Mayor Kevin Hartke said the city is “proud to welcome” TOCALO.

“TOCALO’s advanced surface-treatment and thermal-spray technologies are integral to leading semiconductor manufacturing equipment, and the company’s decision to locate in west Chandler reflects strong confidence in our workforce, infrastructure and business environment,” the mayor said.

“This investment will strengthen the semiconductor supply chain, create high-quality jobs and further reinforce Chandler’s role in the global semiconductor ecosystem,” he added. “We look forward to supporting TOCALO’s successful launch and long-term growth in our community.”

The Japanese company is leasing a building for $8.5 million, according to Edyie McCall, a senior program manager for the city of Chandler’s economic development team.

TOCALO expects to create 33 jobs at the facility over the first three years, with an average salary of $63,030, McCall told The Center Square.

The company will “make a great impact” on the city’s semiconductor industry, she said, noting the city has over 31 semiconductor companies operating in it.

McCall said the city of Chandler has targeted industries, which include automatic technology, aviation and aerospace, business and finance services, health care, bioscience, information technology and software and high tech manufacturing.

Chandler has a “diversified community” of businesses, McCall said. She added the city did not provide any tax subsidies to TOCALO.

Alyssa Tufts, the vice president of the Arizona Commerce Authority, told The Center Square by email that TOCALO qualified for $660,000 in performance-based tax credits.

Arizona will give a smaller amount of taxpayer money between two options.

The first option is 10% of TOCALO's total investment in its facility, and the second option is based on the number of jobs created. For investments under $2 billion, the tax subsidy per new job is $20,000. However, if an investment exceeds $2 billion, it increases to $30,000 per job.

If TOCALO creates the expected 33 jobs, then it would receive $660,000.

Zach Venvertloh, vice president of Business Development at the Greater Phoenix Economic Council, told The Center Square that his organization partnered with the Arizona Commerce Authority and the city to help bring TOCALO to Chandler.

The economic council’s main role was helping the company understand “dynamics of the market from a lifestyle aspect,” such as helping the company figure out where potential employees would be living, eating and seeking entertainment, he noted.

On top of this, Venvertloh said the economic council helped the company connect with general construction companies to build out its facility.

A company like TOCALO “adds to the supply chain” by helping “other companies to carry out operations,” he said.

TOCALO is a “quality employer” that will help strengthen the state’s semiconductor ecosystem, Venvertloh said.

With the company’s addition, the greater Phoenix region “becomes more attractive for additional semiconductor companies,” he explained.

Venvertloh said the greater Phoenix area is a “global leader in the semiconductor industry.” Since 2020, when TSMC entered Phoenix, the economic council has helped more than 50 semiconductor companies establish operations in the region, he noted.

Phoenix is “truly on the map for any global company that is looking to expand [its] footprint in the semiconductor industry,” Venvertloh said.

Last month, Arizona and Japan signed a memorandum of understanding to strengthen economic ties across industries, including semiconductors, research and development, and workforce development.

(The Center Square) - A measles outbreak, which started in August, continuces to impact the communities surrounding the Utah and Arizona border.

Currently Utah has 583 measles cases, with 249 in the southwestern part of the state. Arizona has 292 cases, with 275 in Mohave County. These numbers are as of Tuesday, when the states both last updated their numbers.

Measles cases have increased on a “fairly steady basis” over the last month, according to David Heaton, a public information officer for the Southwest Utah Public Health Department. The department has jurisdiction in five counties: Beaver, Garfield, Iron, Kane and Washington.

Heaton told The Center Square that the measles outbreak is considered to be community-spread, which he described as “pretty contagious.”

The rest of the measles cases in Utah “appear to be connected” to Southwestern Utah’s outbreak, he explained.

Over the last month, rather than being concentrated in the southwest part of the state, the outbreak has spread throughout Utah, Heaton said.

Southwest Utah makes up 43% of the state’s measles cases.

The University of Minnesota’s Center for Infectious Disease Research & Policy labeled Utah as the current epicenter for the measles outbreak in America.

So far this year, Utah has had 386 new measles cases, with 121 of them in the last three weeks.

Southwestern Utah has seen the majority of its measles cases among the unvaccinated, Heaton noted.

He said the state is asking parents who are hesitant about the measles vaccine to at least consider getting the first measles shot, which he said provides 90% protection against the disease.

The public information officer also said Utah is asking people who think they may have measles to call the health care facility they're visiting ahead of time. That will allow staff members to take precautions and prevent those facilities from being turned into exposure sites.

In Arizona, Nicole Witt, the assistant director of preparedness at the state's Department of Health Services, said the department is “continually concerned about measles” and its spread in the state.

She told The Center Square that Arizona has 72 measles cases so far this year.

Regarding Mohave County, the ADHS has seen a “much slower rate of cases,” which Witt said the department is “happy to see.”

Since the measles outbreak began in August, Witt said Arizona and Utah have been working closely together, discussing the outbreak along their shared border during weekly meetings.

“We stay on alert and continue to work with our local and federal partners as well as the state of Utah on monitoring” the measles outbreak, Witt said.

She told The Center Square there is a lot of movement seen across the border between Arizona and Utah, noting many residents in Mohave County will go to Utah to seek medical care, shop or attend school.

In recent weeks, Coconino County, which borders Mohave County, has seen two additional measles cases, according to Witt. She said the department is “working closely with the county in supporting [its] response.”

Mohave County has seen an increase in measles vaccination, Witt said, noting the local health department has done a lot of work to promote the measles vaccine.

According to the assistant director, 97% of the measles cases in Arizona are among the unvaccinated population.

She called the measles vaccine the “best protection” against the disease, saying the vaccine provides 97% protection against measles if people receive both doses.

Witt said people who are considering getting the measles vaccine should contact their health care provider if they have any questions.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, no person in America who has gotten measles this year has died from it. Furthermore, the CDC said 5% of measles cases resulted in hospitalization.

(The Center Square) - Arizona Senate Republicans are challenging a resolution Pima County passed that restricts federal law enforcement from conducting operations in the county.

Senate President Warren Petersen, R-Gilbert; President Pro Tempore T.J. Shope, R-Casa Grande; and Majority Leader John Kavanagh, R-Fountain Hills, filed a complaint this week with Attorney General Kris Mayes’ office in an effort to stop the resolution.

The Republicans’ complaint said the resolution “limits and restricts ICE's ability to comply with the congressional mandate to inspect, investigate, arrest, detain, and remove aliens who are suspected of being, or found to be, unlawfully present in the United States.” The resolution requests Mayes to investigate the matter.

Pima County borders Mexico and is located in the south-central part of Arizona.

In February, the Pima County Board of Supervisors approved a resolution that prevents federal law enforcement from using county-owned properties without permission for civil immigration enforcement activities.

Under Pima County's resolution, federal law enforcement can use county property only if a valid arrest warrant signed by a federal or state judicial officer is shown to someone associated with the county.

County employees are not allowed to assist federal law enforcement “with civil immigration enforcement activities,” the resolution said. It added that employees should also report to their supervisors if they see federal law enforcement attempting to use county property without approval.

“Nothing in this Resolution shall be construed as restricting or interfering with the execution of court orders or lawful judicial warrants,” it says.

Kavanagh told The Center Square that Pima County’s resolution violates state law because it prohibits local governments from cooperating to the ”fullest extent allowed by federal law with immigration enforcement.”

In addition, Pima County is violating the state Constitution, which says federal law takes precedent over any conflicting state law, he said.

Mayes will need to take action on the complaint to decide whether Pima County is violating federal law, Kavanagh said. “ I would hope that she would sustain the complaint because on so many levels, they're violating state law."

However, Kavanagh said the Democratic attorney general “has shown hostility towards immigration law enforcement, so I'm not necessarily confident that she will sustain the complaint.”

In January, the majority leader called on Mayes to resign after she said individuals who feel they are in danger can legally shoot masked federal law enforcement officers.

If Mayes backs the Senate Republican leaders' complaint, it will send a “clear message” to Pima County, Kavanagh said.

He added that if the attorney general sustains the complaint and Pima County does not remove the resolution, the county will lose its state-shared revenue.

Pima County Board member Steve Christy, who represents District 4, told The Center Square that he had concerns the county would lose state funds if it didn’t rescind the resolution.

”This could hit Pima County where it hurts Pima County the most in its pocketbook, and there would be nobody to blame for that, but Pima County,” he said.

Christy, the board's lone Republican, was the only member to vote against the resolution. He said it is “unlawful interference with law enforcement agencies.”

Senate Republicans were “totally justified” in filing a complaint with the attorney general, Christy noted.

Pima County Supervisor Matt Heinz of District 2 told The Center Square that people in the county are “feeling very unsettled and preyed upon.”

According to Heinz, it is “well established that local jurisdictions have absolute control over their own buildings and other properties.”

“I don’t think we’re in a territory where there’s going to be a problem. We’ll see what the attorney general says after the 30-day review process,” he said.

Heinz, a Democrat, said the new resolution will not “have any significant impact” on federal law enforcement, noting that the county has not been asked by the federal government to do operations on county property in the more than 20 years he has lived in the area.

“This is just state senators picking on Pima County,” Heinz said.

In another public safety matter on Tuesday, the Pima County Board of Supervisors, in a 4-1 vote, approved an ordinance that prevents law enforcement from wearing masks.

Heinz said the new mask ordinance is a “protection against unlawful impersonation.”

He added that Pima County is “not specifically targeting federal law enforcement,” noting the ordinance applies to local law enforcement as well.

Heinz said exemptions exist for SWAT teams and special response teams.

“The potential for impersonation is incredibly problematic and a public safety concern that we wanted to address,” Heinz said.

According to Christy, federal agents are wearing masks to “protect themselves and their families from being doxxed.”

“Paid agitators and very violent people who are attracted to any kind of situation where law enforcement is involved with conducting their immigration duties, they will take advantage of the situation by whatever means they can," he said.

Christy was the only supervisor to vote against the mask ordinance.

If the Senate Republicans want to file a complaint with the attorney general regarding the county’s new masking ordinance, they will need to file a separate one, Heinz said.

The Center Square reached out to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security and Mayes’ office, but did not hear back before press time.

(The Center Square) - Congress is considering legislation to end voter registration online or by mail and add requirements of in-person passport or birth certificate verification for most citizens.

The election measures are bundled into the SAVE America Act that the U.S. House passed in February by a narrow vote of 218-213, with just one Democrat voting in favor. The Senate is currently considering the bill, which would require 60 votes to pass. Republican senators currently have a 53-member majority.

Proponents of the bill have argued it would root out a nationwide noncitizen voting problem and restore trust in elections. But experts, including those in Southwestern states, have widely expressed concern that millions of Americans, including most married women, would face unnecessary barriers at the ballot box.

“The bill is a tool that would be used to likely disenfranchise eligible citizens from being able to cast a ballot,” American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada Executive Director Athar Haseebullah told The Center Square.

Critics of the bill contend a nationwide noncitizen voting problem doesn't exist. They point to voter citizenship counts showing nearly no examples of noncitizen voting, which is already a federal crime punishable by jail time.

In Nevada, three individual votes were found to have been illegally cast by noncitizens out of 1.1 million in the 2016 election, according to the Nevada Secretary of State’s office. Similar findings have been reproduced across many states in recent years. A January 2026 statewide citizenship review by the state of Utah found one noncitizen in the voter database – 99.9% of Utah voters were verifiable U.S. citizens.

“It's a non-issue – the voter rolls are maintained here,” said Haseebullah.

Efforts to further prevent noncitizen voting have nonetheless gained widespread support. A February Harvard survey of 1,999 registered voters found that 71% supported the SAVE America Act, including 50% of Democrats.

“This is about restoring trust in our elections, not disenfranchising voters,” Arizona state Senate President Warren Petersen, R-Gilbert, told The Center Square, answering questions by email. “This is an 80/20 issue with overwhelming public support. There is no excuse it has not passed.”

The White House has advocated for the measure.

"The President is calling on Republicans and Democrats to pass the SAVE America Act," the White House said in a statement. "Requirement for Voter I.D. to vote should be something that NO American should oppose. If you want to register to vote in the United States, you have to be a citizen in the United States.

"The SAVE America ACT will direct states to remove non-citizens from the voter rolls," the White House said. "AMERICA lags behind other nations in enforcing basic and necessary election protections."

The White House cited election security measures in countries such as Canada, Germany, India, Brazil, Denmark and Sweden.

But experts at the nonpartisan Brennan Center for Justice argued that the national government would do more harm by creating new barriers for legal voters than the few noncitizen votes the SAVE America Act would prevent.

The bill would increase voting registration requirements, mandating in-person proof of citizenship at an election office for everybody. Only 6% of voters currently register at election offices, with online voting being the most popular method available in 42 states according to vote.org.

This change would have an outsized impact on rural and young voters, according to media reports. In Nevada, some rural voters would have to drive more than 4 hours round-trip to register to vote, KNPR reported.

“Especially in a place like Nevada, which is quite a large state geographically, there's not a polling place every two minutes,” said Haseebullah.

Neither a standard driver’s license nor the new REAL ID would qualify as voter ID under the SAVE America Act. Military IDs and tribal IDs would require additional verification, with only five states (Michigan, Minnesota, New York, Vermont and Washington) providing enhanced IDs that would be considered valid forms of voter ID, according to vote.org.

For the rest of the country, either a passport, birth certificate paired with photo ID, naturalization certificate, or consular report of birth abroad would need to be verified at an election office. Existing registered voters would have to follow the same standards when they re-registered, which is required after moving.

An estimated 21 million citizens lack access to proof of citizenship documents, according to the Brennan Center. Half of citizens lack passports. People of color are disproportionately represented here, including many older Black Americans born pre-civil rights era who were never issued birth certificates, according to the Brennan Center.

The proof of citizenship requirement also presents additional challenges to people who have changed their name. According to the Center for American Progress, roughly 69 million married women would need to present a marriage certificate to vote under the SAVE America Act because of last name changes from marriage. Similarly, an estimated 210,800 transgender people who have changed their name to better suit their post-transition gender would need to present name change documents to vote, according to The 19th news website.

“Arizona doesn’t need Washington politicians telling us how to run our elections,” Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs’ Press Secretary Liliana Soto told The Center Square, answering questions by email. “Governor Hobbs opposes any legislation that threatens Arizonans’ rights, including secure mail-in voting, a method trusted by Republicans, Democrats, and independents alike.”

Opponents have raised questions about the proposed increased involvement of the federal government in elections. Elections have historically been mostly overseen by local and state governments with only a minimal federal role, according to the Constitution Center.

Others have voiced concern over the cost of citizenship-proving documents. Passports cost a total of $165, while a birth certificate can be anywhere from $10 to $50.

“Our position is that it is a poll tax – that charging people to go and obtain documents in order to exercise a fundamental, constitutionally protected right is inherently unlawful,” said Haseebullah.

A poll tax, or required cost to vote, is unconstitutional, as per the 24th Amendment. Critics say the price of required documents is an indirect cost to vote.

“The real effort here is to create voter suppression and to preclude individuals from being able to vote, as they're entitled to do,” said Haseebullah. “[This is] including those who have had name changes as a result of marriage.”

(The Center Square) – Arizona lawmakers are debating a bill that would require public schools to allow students to leave campus for religious instruction, raising questions about parental rights and constitutional limits.

State Senate President Warren Petersen, R-Gilbert, is sponsoring Senate Bill 1741, which aims to address what Petersen describes as inconsistent school district policies that can limit parental authority.

“SB 1741 solves the problem of inconsistent local policies that sometimes prevent parents from exercising their rights to direct their children’s religious and moral education,” Petersen told The Center Square. “It standardizes a clear requirement with strong safeguards, building on Arizona’s Parents’ Bill of Rights.”

The bill would require districts to permit students, with parental consent, to leave campus for voluntary religious courses for up to five hours per week. The instruction must take place off school grounds and cannot receive public funding.

Petersen said the legislation is intended to reinforce parental rights while remaining within constitutional limits.

“The main goal is to affirm parents’ fundamental right to guide their child’s religious and moral upbringing,” Petersen told The Center Square. “The program operates entirely off school property with no public funds, consistent with longstanding constitutional precedent.”

Opponents argue the bill could blur the separation of church and state and reduce instructional time.

During an Arizona House floor session, Arizona State Rep. Nancy Gutierrez, D-Tucson, criticized the proposal and organizations backing such programs.

“The program is designed to inject religious instruction into the public school day with the goal of ‘providing Bible education for every child in Arizona,’” Gutierrez said, gesturing with air quotes. “People do not choose public and charter schools for Bible education.”

Gutierrez also said the bill would take away from valuable instructional time.

“This is a ridiculous ask of public schools to allow students out of their control, off of their campus for this and sacrifice school time for it,” Gutierrez said.

The Center Square reached out to Gutierrez for further comment, but did not receive a response.

Arizona State Rep. Matt Gress, R-Phoenix, who supports the bill, said it doesn’t force students to participate.

Gress, chair of the House’s education committee, said the measure wouldn’t force any student to participate. “This is completely voluntary and also requires the parents to sign off on it."

The bill would also require organizations providing religious instruction to assume legal responsibility for students while off campus.

“It is view-point neutral, empowers parental choice, includes rigorous safeguards, and upholds Arizona’s commitment to both academic focus and family autonomy,” Petersen said.

Gress pointed to a 1952 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that upheld students may leave school during the day if such programs are conducted off campus.

“It’s called the First Amendment, folks,” Gress said. “The Free Exercise provision of the First Amendment trumps whatever instructional time model we have.”

SB 1741 passed the Arizona Senate in February with only Republican support and has received preliminary approval in the House. The bill still needs a final House vote before heading to Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs' desk.

(The Center Square) - A large number of Arizonans have voiced their displeasure to the Surprise City Council about the incoming federal immigration detention center.

People who spoke at the council meeting Tuesday night criticized the planned U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement facility and expressed their frustrations with the city. During the public comments portion of the meeting, 74 speakers signed up. Only two spoke about issues unrelated to ICE, and Mayor Kevin Sartor limited comments to one hour to prevent the meeting from going too long.

The city council did not take any action on the detention facility because the topic was labeled as strictly a discussion item on the agenda. But City Councilmember Chris Judd said he would bring the facility as an action item at the next meeting.

The federal government awarded GardaWorld a $313 million contract to renovate a Surprise warehouse as the new ICE facility. Some of the concerns speakers expressed to the city council about the ICE facility included its location near schools, skepticism about the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s trustworthiness and objections to Sartor’s press conference on the facility.

The mayor held a press conference last week to give Surprise residents information about the incoming detention facility. He said the detention facility will house a maximum of 542 people, with only single adults temporarily housed.

According to Sartor, the DHS said during their meeting with him and other city leaders in Washington, D.C., that federal law enforcement officers would not conduct operations in “sensitive areas,” such as schools, churches or senior living facilities.

Two Democratic legislators - state Sens. Analise Ortiz of Glendale and Catherine Miranda of Phoenix - spoke at the city council meeting.

Ortiz told council members that “there is no compromise that should be made with DHS to open this facility.” “The only acceptable option is to stop it from opening at all costs." She noted the council's decision is “about human beings who will be traumatized, hurt and killed if [DHS is] allowed to hold people” at the facility, which is nearly 420,000 square feet and can hold up to 1,500 beds.

Council members have a “state delegation who will have [their] back" to oppose the ICE facility, Ortiz said, referencing Arizona Democrats.

“ People from all over the state are watching," Ortiz told the council. "History is watching. Please do the right thing."

Miranda said it brought “sadness” to her heart that the city council was “having a discussion about detaining people.”

The city council “has the power to say no," the senator told the council. She encouraged council members to file a lawsuit against the federal government with the help of Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes.

The Center Square reached out Wednesday to the Department of Homeland Security and the White House for comment. The White House declined to comment, referring The Center Square to DHS, which did comment for this story.

“As with any transition, we are reviewing agency policies and proposals," a department spokesperson said, answering The Center Square's questions by email. "As Secretary [Markwayne] Mullin said in his confirmation hearing: ‘I will work with the community leaders and make sure that we are delivering for the American people what the President set out … We want to work with community leaders. We want to be good partners.’ ”

Before Tuesday's meeting, four of the six city council members had expressed frustrations with the incoming detention facility: Patrick Duffy, Judd, Earle Greenberg and Johnny Melton.

At the meeting, Judd said he has “a lot of concerns about” the federal government’s plan for the new detention facility, specifically that the DHS would not “put anything in writing.”

He said it is easy for the DHS to say it will do certain things when the department lacks a boss. When Surprise city leaders met with the DHS in Washington, D.C., in March, the federal agency’s leadership was in transition. At the time, President Donald Trump had fired Secretary of Homeland Security Kristi Noem, and a Senate confirmation hearing was underway for U.S. Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Oklahoma, who took Noem’s position. The Senate later confirmed Mullin, and Mullin was sworn in as the new secretary on March 24.

Another concern Judd brought up was water usage for the detention facility. Judd said the Surprise City Council passed a high-water-use ordinance that says if people use more than 100,000 gallons of water per day, they must get the council’s approval.

City Manager Andrea Davis estimated that at full build-out, the detention facility could use almost 270,000 gallons per day.

Judd said the city's highest water user currently consumes 80,000 gallons per day.

At his previous press conference, Sartor said he was not concerned about the increase in water usage that would come from this facility.

Judd, meanwhile, said the facility's location was “terrible.” He noted Surprise has zoning laws that are meant to protect the city’s community, the city’s interest and its “smart, orderly growth.”

The city council would talk about whether the city had any legal options to protect its zoning from the federal government, Judd said.

The council member also raised concerns about the facility being close to the Luke Air Force Base. He said the base was at risk of closure in the 1990s, when the federal government was closing military bases.

To keep the base active, the state passed laws to “protect the mission at Luke,” according to Judd. The base trains fighter pilots.

Judd added that a state law outlawed overnight stays in departure areas near the base.

If Surprise started allowing people to stay overnight in departure areas around the Air Force base, it “would be jeopardizing the mission at Luke" and could lead to the base's closure, he said.

Judd also noted the federal government could spend up to an estimated $750 million of taxpayers' money on the detention facility.

Brent Peak, the co-chair of Northwest Valley Indivisible, spoke to The Center Square before Tuesday night’s meeting. His organization has been trying to stop the detention center from operating in Surprise.

Peak said the group’s primary concern since the mayor’s press conference is that Arizona and Surprise emergency response plans “are based on risk management plans” that are outdated for Rinchem, the chemical storage plant across the street from the new detention center location.

Peak said Rinchem has six months to update its plan because when the company first designed it, Rinchem did not factor in that there would be a large detention facility housing “hundreds to thousands of people who cannot self-evacuate” during an emergency such as a tank explosion or chemical spill.

He said Rinchem will have until June to update its risk management plan.

According to Peak, without the company’s updated plan, the facility should not developed.

(The Center Square) - California gas prices climbed as high as $6 a gallon as oil prices skyrocketed ahead of President Donald Trump's deadline on Iran to reopen oil trade routes in the Strait of Hormuz.

Prices rose in the Southwest before Trump on Tuesday evening announced a two-week ceasefire with Iran.

With an average price of $5.93 a gallon, California continued to be well above the national average, with one motorist in Anaheim paying $44.09 for 7.35 gallons of regular gas Sunday, or $6 per gallon.

Nevada, which buys its gasoline from California oil refineries, passed the $5 threshold by a penny and edged closer to its 2022 record of $5.68. Arizona reached $4.75 as Colorado stayed below $4 with an average of $3.81 a gallon. All of the prices are averages reported by AAA.

The record-breaking high for the national average was $5.02 in June 2022, shortly after the Russia-Ukraine war began and as the COVID-19 pandemic was ending. The current average of $4.14 is up over a dollar from immediately before the conflict with Iran started on Feb. 28.

“In the Southwest, it's a little bit more of a dire straits situation when it comes to the prices at the pump,” said GasBuddy Petroleum analyst Matt McClain.

“We are going to continue to see price increases irrespective of what happens tonight,” McClain told The Center Square.

“But if the president goes through on his threats, it's record territory," he said before Trump announced the cease-fire with Iran.

In Colorado, where prices are lower than the national average of $4.14 a gallon, consumers have seen an increase of about 50 cents a gallon since one month ago.

“Colorado has still had a substantial jump [in price],” Auto Club Group Spokesperson Skyler McKinley in Colorado told The Center Square. “The floor was lower in part because of competition within the local gas markets, among other considerations.”

McKinley said that while regular gas increases were worth paying attention to, current diesel prices were potentially more notable for consumers. “By all accounts we’re on track to set a new diesel record in the United States."

Nationally, a gallon of diesel hit $5.65 Tuesday, up over $1 since the U.S.-Israeli conflict with Iran started. The per-gallon record for diesel was set in 2022 at $5.82. In California, diesel was already at an all-time high of $7.73. McClain speculated it could soon approach $8 in the state.

While few Americans drive diesel-fueled cars today, the price of diesel indirectly impacts consumers through the price of transported goods.

“Literally everything that we have on a store shelf arrives either by barge, by semi tractor trailer, or train – and all three of those utilize diesel to get from point A to point B,” said McCain “That factors into the end price that we consumers pay for everything – groceries, clothing, your favorite online store.”

McCain said some consumers had already begun to feel some of those diesel price increases in daily life. “It's going to hit those perimeter of the grocery store [items] first, because the fresh produce, perishable items, never-frozen meats and dairy require more frequent shipments, so they're more sensitive to those shipping [costs].”

The U.S. could continue to see higher gas prices in the coming months, even as very little of the country’s oil supply comes from Iran or the Middle East, according to industry experts.

As a global commodity, the trading price of oil is impacted by its global demand and supply, with countries across the globe already experiencing shortages as a result of Iran’s stranglehold on the Strait of Hormuz. This has been felt hardest in Asian countries, said McClain.

If the Iranian government opens the Strait of Hormuz, relief at the pump could be slow.

“I see it as kind of a one-two punch – a slight decrease, and then it will take, weeks and months, to get it back down to something that's more palatable,” said McClain.

The stop on oil tankers leaving the Strait of Hormuz means that when the floodgates reopen, the large ships could take a long time to reach across the globe. At 13-17 knots (15-20 mph), oil tankers move at roughly the speed of a bicycle, according to maritime publisher Marine Insight.

“There's no easy way to unravel what you've got going on in," said McClain. "It's going to take weeks and weeks, or more than likely actually months and months, for prices to get back down to where we were prior."

The Center Square) - Arizona Republicans are mulling their options after the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against them in a lawsuit challenging a 917,000-acre national monument near Grand Canyon National Park.

The court threw out a legal challenge last week to a monument former President Joe Biden created in 2023. The monument protects federal land surrounding the park to honor the ancestral homelands of local Native American tribes.

The 9th Circuit court dismissed the case because judges found the plaintiffs lacked legal standing.

The plaintiffs are state Senate President Warren Petersen, R-Gilbert; House Speaker Steve Montenegro, R-Surprise; State Treasurer Kimberly Yee, a Republican; Mohave County; Colorado City; and the city of Fredonia.

This ruling upholds a decision by a U.S. district court in Arizona, which rejected the plaintiffs’ original legal challenge in January 2025.

Petersen said it was “sad to see the 9th Circuit kicked the can down the road.”

“The court did not address whether the Biden administration had the right to create this massive national monument around the Grand Canyon. It simply ruled that our challenge came too soon,” Petersen told The Center Square, answering questions by email.

“Arizona families should not have to wait years while our land and economic opportunities remain locked up,” he added.

Petersen said state Republicans “will continue fighting to protect Arizona’s economy, jobs, and state sovereignty from this expansive federal land lock-up, including through any available avenues at the federal level.”

He noted the plaintiffs “are actively working with the Trump administration to undo this illegal land grab.”

In their legal challenge, the plaintiffs argued creating the national monument would cause local governments to lose tax revenue from uranium mining that could take place once the 2012 mining ban expired in 2032.

The 9th Circuit judges said this reasoning was too “speculative” as to “whether the right economic conditions and incentives for uranium mining will exist so far into the future.”

Colorado City alleged the new monument could restrict its water supply because it draws water from an aquifer located on land within the monument. The judges said the national monument proclamation does not change water rights or restrict the city's water access.

The Arizona Legislature said the monument impeded its ability to rule over state land. However, the 9th Circuit court noted the Legislature still had control over state land and that the monument affects only federal land.

The plaintiffs also said state land near the monument would lose value and create less revenue. But the judges dismissed the argument.

Furthermore, the plaintiffs alleged the national monument would raise energy prices in the future, but the court noted this reasoning depended on “many unknown variables.”

“Any future economic harm from higher energy prices caused by the Proclamation is accordingly far too speculative to support standing,” the judges wrote.

Kris Mayes, Arizona’s attorney general, said the ruling was a “victory for the people of Arizona and for the Indigenous communities whose ancestral homelands are protected by this monument.”

The Democrat, who was an intervener in the case, added she was “proud to have stood up to defend these sacred and important lands."

(The Center Square) – The federal government is telling states to back off attempts to regulate prediction markets after several states took legal action to block the federally regulated markets from operating in their states.

At the center of the dispute is whether states or the federal government should have the final say over prediction markets, which allow people to bet on real-world outcomes such as sports and elections. As states ramp up enforcement against these markets, the CFTC asserts its exclusive authority, setting up a legal battle that could determine the future of event-based trading nationwide.

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission filed lawsuits challenging the actions of Arizona, Connecticut, and Illinois against Kalshi and other federally regulated operators.

States have acted to block or regulate how these markets operate. For example, Arizona filed criminal charges against Kalshi in March. The state alleged the New York-based company operated an illegal gambling business in Arizona without a license and engaged in election wagering. Nevada has blocked prediction markets from operating within its borders.

The CFTC says it alone can oversee event contracts under the Commodity Exchange Act. It says some states have tried to ban operators who trade in event contracts that are allowed under federal law. The agency emphasized, "Congress long ago decided that rules for commodity trading should be the same nationwide, not different from state to state."

"The CFTC will continue to safeguard its exclusive regulatory authority over these markets and defend market participants against overzealous state regulators," CFTC Chairman Michael Selig said in a statement.

Selig said Congress designed a federal framework to prevent a fragmented patchwork of state regulations. He said this patchwork led to weaker consumer protection and an increased risk of fraud and manipulation.

The Illinois Attorney General's office is reviewing the federal complaint, a spokeswoman told The Center Square.

The Arizona Attorney General's Office declined to comment on the federal suit Monday. However, Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes previously said companies don't get to decide which state laws they follow.

The CFTC, which first recognized event contracts in 1992, said that after the 2008 financial crisis, Congress granted it authority over such contracts involving broadly defined commodities.

To resolve the dispute over regulatory authority, the Department of Justice's action asked a federal judge to clarify who is in charge.

"Unless restrained and enjoined by the Court, Defendants are likely to continue their attempts to subvert federal law and the exclusive jurisdiction to regulate event contract swaps conferred on the CFTC by Congress," DOJ attorney Tiberius Davis wrote in the lawsuit.

The Center Square reached out to Kalshi and Polymarket for comment on the federal suit.

Prediction markets have faced national scrutiny for operating under event contract law at the CFTC, while also being accused of sports betting that should fall under state regulation.

A New Jersey circuit court ruled on Monday that prediction markets likely fall under federal jurisdiction, but one dissenting judge wrote that the markets are "virtually indistinguishable from sportsbooks.”

Sports gambling attorney Daniel Wallach wrote Sunday that states had won 14 of 16 preliminary rulings against prediction markets in state courts before the New Jersey ruling.

States v. PMs Scorecard:(On contested motions for a temporary restraining order and/or preliminary injunction by either side)States have won 14PMs have won 2— Daniel Wallach (@WALLACHLEGAL) April 6, 2026

Prediction markets gained popularity during the football season, with offerings very similar to those of sportsbooks. The event contracts have a user pick a side in a matchup or election and put their money behind it against other users.

These markets are overseen at the federal level by the CFTC, the government agency responsible for regulating futures and options markets. They do not require separate taxes paid to individual states.

(The Center Square) - Attorney General Kris Mayes is challenging a recent decision made by the Arizona Corporation Commission to raise water and sewer rates for people in Robson Ranch.

The Democratic Arizona attorney general filed a rehearing application this week with the ACC to challenge its recent 3-2 decision approving increases of water service fees by 23% and sewer service fees by 154% for the retirement community south of Casa Grande, a city that's halfway between Phoenix and Tucson.

In the application, Mayes said the commission’s rate increase decision violates its duty to set rates that are “just and reasonable.”

“Arizona courts have consistently held that ‘just and reasonable rates’ are those that are fair to both consumers and public service corporations,’ the application said.

Mayes said the rate increases approved from the Picacho Water Co. and Picacho Sewer Co. are “in complete disregard of the impact of those increases upon residential ratepayers,” calling them “unjust and unreasonable.”

Mayes argued the ACC’s rate increase is the “very definition of rate shock, constituting an utter disregard of the impacts to residential ratepayers – a violation of Arizona law.”

“Robson Ranch residents have no alternative utility providers. They are captive customers of Picacho Water Co. and Picacho Sewer Co., with no ability to shop for better rates or switch to a competitor,” the attorney general said.

“Arizona's founders enshrined the Corporation Commission in the state Constitution specifically to protect consumers from exploitation by monopoly utilities,” she added. “When the Commission fails to fulfill that role, my office will step in to protect Arizonans."

Thomas Van Flein, general counsel for ACC, said “the Commission takes each complaint or application for rehearing seriously.”

“However, policy disputes are not the same as legal error. The Commission follows the statutes, the Constitution and relevant case law giving it guidance. Policy disputes are not to be resolved in court or even in a rehearing,” Van Flein told The Center Square, answering questions by email.

Picacho Water Co. and Picacho Sewer Co., which are owned by JW Water Holdings LLC, had not filed a rate increase since 1998 and 1999, respectively. JW Water, a private equity firm, purchased the utility companies in 2024.

ACC Chairman Nick Myers said the commission “took significant steps to reduce ratepayer impact” by setting the return on equity rate to 9.65%.

Rachel Walden, ACC vice chair, said JW Water is not “recovering revenue losses over the course of the past 25-plus years, nor are they recovering the purchase price of the utilities.”

She added that this rate case only pertained to establishing rates to “cover the cost of services.”

Both Myers and Walden voted in favor of the rate increases.

Under the new increased rates, Robson Ranch customers will be paying $36.87 per month on average for water and $106.73 per month on average for sewer. Before the rate increases, the average water bill per month was $30.01 per month and $42.00 per month for sewer services.

ACC Commissioner Kevin Thompson, who voted against the rate increase proposal, said the rate increases “should adhere to principles of gradualism.”

“As a regulator, I felt I had a duty to advocate for a resolution that strikes an appropriate balance between all parties and not subject these ratepayers to the consequences of business decisions that were no fault of their own," Thompson said.

Commissioner Lea Márquez Peterson, the other ACC commissioner to vote against the rate increase, said JW Water should have conducted more public outreach and communication about the “sewer utility case to the ratepayers.”

“We received many public comments concerning the dramatic rate increase though an increase was certainly expected from a utility who hadn’t filed a rate case in over 25 years,” she said. “I believe that more could have been done to promote gradualism in the sewer rate case.”

The Center Square reached out to JW Water, but did not hear back before press time.

(The Center Square) - Leaders of the Republican majority in the Arizona Legislature are telling residents to file their taxes now despite uncertainty over tax laws.

The Arizona Department of Revenue sent out tax forms to Arizonans despite the governor's office still determining how Arizona will change its tax laws to conform to the federal law changes made last July with congressional passage of H.R. 1 - the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

With the tax filing deadline coming up on April 15, “people are nervous because there’s a lack of clarity from the governor’s office” on tax conformity, said Senate President Warren Petersen.

Tax forms have already been sent out, and over 1 million people have filed, Petersen, R-Gilbert, told The Center Square this week.

According to Petersen, Republicans are seeking to implement all the tax cuts from the One Big Beautiful Bill, while Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs wants to implement around half the cuts.

Petersen noted he wants to give Arizonans the certainty and confidence to file their tax returns and get the full range of tax cuts.

“There’s no scenario where we would allow the governor to punish taxpayers,” he said.

Petersen, who has been in the state Legislature for 14 years, said he has never previously seen the Arizona Department of Revenue issued tax forms, only to be followed by the governor proposing contradictory forms.

Petersen said “all the momentum supports Republicans” because as more taxpayers keep filing their taxes, it will become harder for Hobbs to “unwind what she has put forward.”

Republicans are working on a budget currently that will be responsible, balanced and include full tax conformity to the One Big Beautiful Bill, the Senate president said.

Petersen added he is hopeful Hobbs will return to the budget negotiation table with the Arizona Republican leadership. Negotiations are at an impasse after Petersen and House Speaker Steve Montenegro, R-Surprise, said the governor walked away

“She walked away and said, ‘Send me a budget.’ That’s what we’re going to do,” Petersen told The Center Square.

According to Montenegro, Arizona Republicans “are holding the line."

“File your taxes. We will not support anything that forces Arizonans to refile or pay more because of the governor's poor decisions,” the speaker said. “Arizona families deserve certainty, and Gov. Hobbs failed to provide it.”

Petersen said within the next 30 days Republicans “are hoping” to send a budget to Hobbs’ desk.

Liliana Soto, Hobbs’ press secretary, told The Center Square by email that "we're glad they agree with the governor that Arizonans should file their taxes."

“Now, they need to pass the governor's middle-class tax cuts, show their budget to the public, and negotiate with the office in good faith," she said.

Senate Minority Leader Priya Sundareshan, D-Tucson, told The Center Square by email that “Senate Republicans are now telling Arizonans to file their taxes, after weeks of chaos and confusion they created.”

“Let’s be clear: Since day one, Senate Democrats have encouraged you to file. For most Arizonans taking the standard deduction, there’s no issue,” Sundareshan said. “The ‘urgency’ Republicans have pushed these last few months was manufactured due to their unwillingness to negotiate, and no filers will be impacted for this tax year.”

The Senate minority leader called the Republicans' budget “unbalanced,” noting “negotiations have stalled because they still haven’t brought forward a real plan, one that includes renewing Prop 123 and investing in Arizona’s future.”

“Don’t get distracted. Senate Democrats are fighting for an Arizona you can afford while Republicans are pushing bills that don’t help you succeed,” she said.

Chad Heinrich, state director of Arizona's chapter of the National Federation of Independent Business, told The Center Square it was “comforting that the [Republicans] have said taxpayers should file with confidence and that they are not going to allow changes to the tax base to impact the 2025 tax year.”

However, the state director pointed out that it's 2026 and that businesses “are making purchasing decisions right now.”

Arizona’s current tax uncertainty is not just an accounting problem, according to Heinrich, whose association's membership consists of businesses with five to 10 employees. He said it's also an “economic growth problem for Arizonans because businesses want to have certainty as to what the tax treatment [is] going to be for purchases [they] make in 2026.”

Every day the Legislature does not act on tax conformity is “another day Arizona businesses are making decisions in the dark,” Heinrich said, noting this is having “real economic consequences.”

Heinrich urged the Legislature and Hobbs to reach an agreement on federal tax conformity for tax year 2025 and future years.

“ That is the key to business owners being able to plan and make investment decisions in their business, because right now, many of them are sitting on the sidelines due to the uncertainty that's been created,” he noted.

If the state's budget ultimately includes only half of the tax conformity measures, then it will “be a nasty surprise for every taxpayer in the state,” according to Heinrich.

“Anything that they choose not to conform with would equal a tax increase,” Heinrich said.

(The Center Square) - Grand Canyon National Park announced the reopening date for an area that experienced one of the largest fires in Arizona’s history.

The park said its North Rim will reopen at 6 a.m. May 15.

The North Rim was hit by the Dragon Bravo Fire, which burned 145,504 acres in the park after lightning started it on July 4, 2025. It continued to burn until it was 100% contained by late September. The North Rim partially reopened in the same month, but was closed again Nov. 14.

The reopening date “was based on meeting minimum operational and safety conditions following the Dragon Bravo Fire," said Joelle Baird, a spokesperson for the Grand Canyon National Park. She said this included “ensuring access, basic sanitation, emergency response capability, and overall visitor safety.”

“Ongoing assessments of post-fire hazards such as debris flows, hazard trees, and infrastructure stability — also informed the timing," Baird said, answering The Center Square's questions by email. "The National Park Service is taking a phased approach, reopening what is safe and feasible while continuing recovery efforts."

She noted the number of visitors going to the North Rim “is to differ from pre-fire levels due to limited services and a focus on day-use opportunities.”

“While the North Rim remains a highly valued destination, reduced amenities and infrastructure will likely influence visitation patterns this season,” she said.

Before the Dragon Bravo Fire, the North Rim saw 500,000 visitors yearly, which accounted for 10% of the park’s visitors.

When the North Rim reopens, its paved roadways will be accessible, allowing scenic drives to Point Imperial, Cape Royal, Roosevelt Point, Walhalla Overlook and Angels Window.

The North Kaibab Trail, which the National Park Service describes as the “most difficult of the major inner canyon trails at the park, will reopen for foot traffic only.

Baird told The Center Square that visitors should “expect a limited-services environment, including no potable water, fuel, lodging, or consistent power.”

“Access will be phased, and some areas may remain closed due to ongoing recovery work or safety concerns. These conditions are directly related to fire impacts and the need to prioritize public safety and resource protection,” she said.

On top of limited services, Baird also said “visitors will notice significantly fewer services and amenities.”

“The 2026 season will focus on scenic drives, viewpoints, and access to trails like the North Kaibab Trail, but without many of the facilities traditionally available,” the spokesperson said.

“The landscape itself has also changed, offering a visible look at post-fire recovery and new growth across the North Rim,” she noted.

Baird called the reopening in 2026 an “important step in informing that long-term vision, with an emphasis on resilience, sustainability, and improved visitor experience over time.”

“The fire has reshaped long-term planning efforts, prompting a comprehensive approach to rebuilding infrastructure and rethinking visitor services,” she said.

According to Baird, this includes “planning for replacement of critical utilities, future lodging, and operational facilities through a formal planning and public engagement process.”

(The Center Square) – Democratic officials from 23 states and the District of Columbia announced Friday they're suing to block President Donald Trump’s recent executive order regulating mail-in and absentee ballots.

The suit was slated to be filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts. A copy of the lawsuit wasn’t available as of press time.

Trump doesn’t have the constitutional authority to control elections, California Attorney General Rob Bonta told reporters during a news conference Friday morning. Bonta, a Democrat who’s co-leading the coalition of plaintiffs, noted the authority rests with states and Congress, not the federal executive branch.

“The framers of our Constitution made sure that how we choose our leaders is not put in the hands of a single leader” such as Trump, Bonta said.

Others co-leading the coalition of plaintiffs are Attorneys General Andrea Joy Campbell of Massachusetts, Aaron Ford of Nevada and Nick Brown of Washington state.

The Center Square reached out Friday morning to the White House, which noted the Republican president’s order was designed to secure elections.

"Only Democrat politicians and operatives would be upset about lawful efforts to secure American elections and ensure only eligible American citizens are casting ballots," White House spokeswoman Abigail Jackson said, answering The Center Square’s questions by email. "President Trump campaigned on securing our elections, and the American people sent him back to the White House to get the job done."

Trump’s executive order, which was issued on March 31, is titled “Ensuring Citizenship Verification and Integrity in Federal Elections.” It cites the Help America Vote Act of 2002, the National Voter Registration Act of 1993 and the federal government’s obligation to ensure a republican form of government in every state under Article IV, Section 4, of the U.S. Constitution. The order also refers to federal laws prohibiting non-citizens from registering to vote or voting in federal elections and the executive branch’s duty to enforce federal laws under Article II of the Constitution.

The executive order directs the secretary of homeland security to compile lists of U.S. citizens who are 18 or older and send them to the chief election official of each state. The order says the list would be based on federal citizenship and naturalization records, Social Security records, SAVE data (used to verify citizenship) and other federal databases.

The order says states must notify the U.S. Postal Service no fewer than 90 days before a federal election if they are using the postal service to deliver mail-in or absentee ballots. The order also says states must send a list of eligible voters to the postal service no fewer than 60 days before a federal election.

Bonta noted the order threatens states with loss of federal funding for failure to comply.

And he contended Trump’s executive order would disrupt the process in which every registered voter in California automatically gets a ballot in the mail.

“Protecting elections is not partisan. Every eligible voter should be able to vote,” Bonta said. “That is foundational to our democracy.”

Bonta said he doesn’t believe the executive order came soon enough to impact California’s June 2 primary, but said it could interfere with the Nov. 3 general election. He added Trump is concerned about Republicans losing congressional seats.

In addition to officials in California, Massachusetts, Washington state, Nevada and the District of Columbia, the lawsuit against Trump's executive order is being filed by Democratic attorneys general from Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia and Wisconsin. Democratic Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro is also among the plaintiffs.

Editor's note: This story has been updated to add a comment from Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs' office.

(The Center Square) - A new Arizona law will allow victims of domestic violence to seek lifetime protection against their abusers.

Gov. Katie Hobbs last week signed into law Senate Bill 1211, which allows victims of domestic violence to seek a lifetime injunction against someone who has been convicted of felony aggravated harassment involving domestic violence. To be convicted of the crime, defendants have continued to harass the victim despite court orders and despite a previous conviction of violence against the victim.

State Sen. Shawnna Bolick, R-Deer Valley, the sponsor of SB 1211, told The Center Square that she was “ecstatic” to see the law signed “so quickly” by the Democratic governor.

Liliana Soto, the governor's press secretary, noted Hobbs is a social worker who operated one of the nation's largest domestic violence shelters.

"She’s proud to have signed SB1211 to protect domestic violence victims because abusers shouldn’t be able to weaponize the court system to continue their abuse," Soto told The Center Square Thursday afternoon.

Before this new law, Bolick said victims of domestic violence had to keep going back to court to get orders of protection. She said this can be a “very time-consuming process and very hard on victims.”

Bolick said she did not realize the extent of the problem until she shadowed a justice of the peace in Maricopa County, where the justice’s docket was full of harassment cases. Maricopa is Arizona's most populous county and is home to Phoenix, the capital.

The state senator said she met Tori Bourguignon in December 2025 at the Flinn Brown Civic Leadership Fellowship proposal day. Bourguignon is the executive director of Amberly’s Place, which is a family advocacy center based in Yuma.

Bourguignon and a group she was with pitched the idea that became SB 1211. Bolick said she told Bourguignon that she would sponsor the bill.

The senator said the state House attempted to tweak SB 1211, but Bolick said she told representatives to leave the bill alone. The bill was passed unanimously by the House and Senate.

Bourguignon told The Center Square that one of her fellowship's capstone projects was to draft a legislative proposal.

While working on the project, she said she had “several cases where victims were at sentencing requesting from the courts a lifetime injunction and being told that aggravated harassment and the lesser felonies don’t qualify as listed crimes under the lifetime injunction statute.”

Her group proposed the idea of adding “aggravated harassment related to domestic violence to the list of qualifying crimes” to help accommodate victims who have to go back every two years to get an order of protection.

Bourguignon said getting an injunction every two years doesn’t cost much, but it did take time and forced courts to “continually hear those cases.”

”From an efficiency standpoint, we're not talking about millions of dollars that this is gonna save, but it saves emotional wear and terror and less trauma for victims, which is the greatest priority,” she said.

“ SB 1211 still affords due process in all cases," Bourguignon told The Center Square. "There's still an opportunity to ask for a hearing, but it's a one-time deal, and if the order stands, it's done."

The bill does not require domestic violence victims to seek a lifetime injunction, but it gives them the option, she said.

This was a “small victory for victims of domestic violence who may wish to seek a lifetime injunction," she added.

Bourguignon said she knows of numerous victims who “are looking forward to the day when they are able to go request a lifetime injunction in their cases.”

According to Bourguignon, SB 1211 is an extension of Kayleigh's Law, which went into effect in 2022 in Arizona. The law allows victims of domestic violence to seek lifetime injunctions if their abuser has been convicted of sexual or domestic abuse offenses.

Bolick said Kayleigh's Law is intended to “help individuals in the long-term” with “protections against the abuser coming after them.”

(The Center Square) - Students in Arizona’s Empowerment Scholarship Account program can use their funds to pay for college, according to Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne.

Arizona law allows participants in the taxpayer-funded, school choice program who don’t spend all their money in a given year to save it for college tuition, Horne told The Center Square this week.

“We want kids to go to college. The percentage of college-educated students in a state has something to do with the success of its economy," Horne said, noting he would like to see more students go to college.

Matt Beienburg, director of education policy at the Phoenix-based Goldwater Institute, said the ESA program is intended to ensure families can deploy their education funds at the level that best supports their needs.

Beienburg told The Center Square this week that students who don’t spend all their ESA money in one school year can have it roll over to future years.

The majority of families who use the ESA program are “in the lower grades,” he said. This year, the ESA program surpassed 100,000 participants.

The ESA program allows students to use their funds for K-12 education, community college, public universities in Arizona, private, accredited post-secondary institutions and out-of-state colleges, Beienburg said.

The ESA program provides an incentive for families to use their resources efficiently, the education policy director noted.

In particular, he said, if families who are in the ESA program home-school their kids and are able to put aside funding each year to go towards college, that is “absolutely something” Arizona should be “glad to see that families are able to do” rather than “facing student debt payments.”

According to Beienburg, a double standard exists when people object to students using ESA funds to pay for college. The education policy director said there is no objection to families using Pell Grants to attend out-of-state institutions.

Pell Grants are taxpayer-funded, federal financial aid for undergraduate students that does not need to be repaid.

Beienburg said ESA program participants are across the “income spectrum” in Arizona.

Last month, the Arizona Education Association and Save Our Schools Arizona filed a ballot initiative, “Protect Education, Accountability Now!” The program seeks to provide greater oversight of the ESA program. One provision of the initiative would prevent the rollover of ESA funds into subsequent years.

This would affect ESA participants' ability to save for college.

A low-income family trying to save for college would have its funds taken away if Arizonans pass the ballot measure, according to Beienburg.

“That’s a terrible public policy decision,” he said.

The ballot initiative would also impose a $150,000 income cap, potentially removing approximately 15% of ESA participants.

(The Center Square) - The Arizona Legislature is considering a bill that would require schools to notify parents and staff about serious threats.

On Monday, the Senate Rules Committee approved House Bill 4109. The bill now goes to the full Senate for deliberation.

The House passed the bill by a vote of 35-17 earlier in March, with seven representatives abstaining. Six Democratic state representatives joined Republicans in voting for it. Rep. Lydia Hernandez, D-Glendale, is sponsoring HB 4109.

The bill mandates schools to notify parents and employees within 24 hours after “life-threatening violence, threats of life-threatening violence or threats that involve a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument.”

Schools would have to include information about what happened and how they responded to the incidents.

Law enforcement would need to be immediately notified after serious threats or violence occur at school, the bill says, adding that schools must confiscate deadly weapons and hold them until police arrive.

HB 4109 would require school districts to submit an annual report on the number of lockdowns, shelter-in-place events, evacuations, weapon-related incidents, law-enforcement-referred incidents and a safety policy summary.

On top of this, the bill would require school districts to create a formal public safety policy that includes procedures for emergencies and designates the superintendent as the person in charge.

Under the bill, district superintendents and school board members may be charged with a misdemeanor if they don't follow the rules.

Superintendents could be charged if they failed to notify parents, contact law enforcement or follow established procedures when serious violence or threats occur.

School board members could face criminal charges if they don’t adopt a public safety policy and if they retaliated against students, their parents, a district employee or anyone else who reported a violation of HB 4109.

Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne told The Center Square that Arizona public schools “have really serious problems.”

“Schools that don’t yet have police are playing Russian roulette with the lives of the students and the teachers and the staff,” he said.

In 2025, there were 500 recorded incidents of students bringing a gun to school, Horne told The Center Square.

Arizona is lucky that it has not had a tragedy, the superintendent noted.

Horne said since he took over as superintendent of public instruction in 2023, “the number of police in schools” has increased from 190 officers to 565.

“We need to do everything we can to protect the safety of our students, teachers [and] staff. A minimal step in that direction is to have the schools report so the public knows when there’ve been incidents of people bringing guns to schools or threatening other people,” he said.

Horne said he has urged schools to allow the state Department of Education to “provide them with police officers.”

“We pay for the police officers," he said. "It doesn’t cost them anything."

(The Center Square) - A new immigration facility planned for Surprise, Ariz. faces some opposition, despite assurances the detention center won't be a prelude to enforcement activities.

Mayor Kevin Sartor said the facility, which will open inside a vacant warehouse, will “house single adults only" for short-term stays.

Sartor made his comments during a press conference on Monday regarding the center, which is nearly 420,000 square feet and can hold up to 1,500 beds.

A document from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement show this type of facility is “capable of securely and humanely housing 7,000 to 10,000 detainees for periods averaging less than 60 days.” Earlier this month, ICE awarded a $313 million contract to GardaWorld Federal Services LLC to renovate the warehouse.

Sartor said he planned to share the information about the detention center with Surprise residents at the April 7 city council meeting, but decided the residents and the media needed details sooner.

Sartor said the city’s responsibility regarding the U.S. Immigration Customs and Enforcement facility is “straightforward,” noting it is to “protect the community, ensure transparency and get the answers" the city needs from its federal partners.

Surprise first learned about the U.S. Department of Homeland Security purchasing the warehouse in January. He said the city’s "No. 1 goal has been to obtain answers and protect [its] community.”

The mayor said Surprise city leadership met with officials from DHS and ICE in Washington, D.C. He said they discussed many topics, including the detention facility’s impact on its community, zoning, legal authority and environmental impacts. He added that DHS said the facility would be a processing center where illegal immigrants would stay for three to seven days. Then they would be transferred to larger detention facilities in El Paso or Salt Lake City or deported.

DHS estimates “operations will begin with approximately 250 individuals per week with a cap of occupied beds of 542,” the mayor said.

Sartor said illegal immigrants will begin appearing at the federal detention facility within the next three to six months. He said there would be about 250 individuals housed there per week with a maximum of 542 occupied beds.

Sartor also quoted DHS saying no illegal immigrants would be released into the community.

“This facility will not trigger local immigration enforcement activities,” the mayor said.

Sartor noted DHS will not have “operations in sensitive areas such as schools, churches or senior citizens.”

At the press conference, Sartor admitted the city can't do much to stop the federal government’s effort to open a new detention center.

“While we cannot stop a federal agency from purchasing land, we can work to mitigate their impact to Suprise,” he said.

“The federal government purchased the land. Whether we want it here or not, they’re here,” the mayor said.

DHS has agreed to provide tours to city leadership and create a community relations board “with city-appointed representation,” he added.

Sartor said his “primary takeaway” from his meeting with DHS is that the federal agency is “committed to timely and consistent coordination with the city moving forward.”

The mayor said the federal government is working with the city to recover property taxes it would have collected from an operating distribution center. The city would have received around $300,000 from the property, Sartor said.

Brent Peak, the co-chair of Northwest Valley Indivisible, a group opposing the detention facility, told The Center Square that the organization does not trust “ICE to stand by anything they are currently promising. It’s ridiculous to assume that a facility that is the size of seven football fields is only intended to hold about 500 single men.”

“That would take up less than 10% of the square footage,” he added.

“Mayor Sartor went to Washington to get answers from DHS. He came back with promises," Peak told The Center Square.

“They'll reimburse the city for lost tax revenue. Their agents will stay inside the facility. They want to be good neighbors. Ronald Reagan called it — ‘The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the government, and I'm here to help,’” he noted.

Peak said Surprise “should be preparing for their broken promises, escalation and tactics that are fundamentally incompatible with this community.”

He added that Northwest Valley Indivisible is asking Sartor and the city council for a resolution at its April 7 meeting.

“We want the mayor to stand with the residents of Surprise in formal opposition to this facility,” Peak said.

“The people of Surprise were never consulted. They were never notified. They were never given a voice. April 7 is their chance to be heard — and it is Mayor Sartor's chance to decide if he stands with them,” he added.

The new detention facility is located within a three-mile radius of 15 schools and a cheerleading academy and will be in the "middle of a massive residential area," Peak said.

“This is a massive warehouse not meant for humans," he added. "It is meant for products to be shipped."

On top of this, Peak told The Center Square that people have environmental concerns about the new facility. The public has not seen “the environmental reviews” DHS has completed, he noted.

Peak also said people are concerned about water and electricity usage, which he described as being the “equivalent of thousands of households when it comes to water and electricity usage.”

At the city's press conference, Sartor said Surprise has “an excellent water portfolio” that can “absorb the impact” of the new detention center, adding that the city is not concerned about water usage.

But Peak noted another reason for opposition to the detention facility is that Surprise residents don’t want a “federal law enforcement presence."

”The community supports a strong border policy, but the way immigration enforcement is being handled hasn't been done in a way that the community can support, and they don't want to see that coming to Surprise,” he noted.

Peak described Surprise as an “extremely conservative area.” The city is split between Arizona’s 8th and 9th congressional districts. Both districts are represented by Republicans: Paul Gosar and Abe Hamadeh.

According to Peak, Northwest Valley Indivisible is also requesting the mayor and city council join in any potential legal action that Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes takes against the detention facility “to slow it down or stop it.”

Mayes told The Center Square via email that she is “deeply concerned about the impact this facility will have on Surprise and its residents.”

“My office never received a response from DHS to the letter we sent asking a series of questions about the planning for this facility. We will continue to monitor the situation and are considering all legal options,” she said.

In February, Mayes sent a letter to then-Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem regarding her concern about the incoming Surprise ICE detention facility. Former U.S. Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Oklahoma, is the new DHS secretary.

The Center Square reached out to Hamadeh’s office and the DHS, but did not hear back before press time.

(The Center Square) - A bill repealing César Chávez Day was awaiting Arizona Gov. Katie Hobbs' signature on the morning of the state holiday, which was Tuesday.

Hobbs, who previously canceled her plans to recognize Chávez, is expected to sign the bill.

The Arizona House on Monday afternoon voted to repeal, but not rename, the holiday that honors Chávez, the late Latino and farmworker rights leader. That followed the Senate's vote to repeal the holiday. César Chávez Day takes place annually on March 31, but is not one of Arizona's 10 paid holidays.

The move came after swift and bipartisan reaction throughout the Southwest to multiple allegations of sexual abuse and rape by Chavez, including from his longtime labor protest partner Dolores Huerta. Chávez and Huerta cofounded the United Farm Workers union.

In California, the Legislature on Thursday renamed the holiday as Farmworkers Day. Gov. Gavin Newsom, who immediately signed the bill, issued a proclamation Tuesday morning in recognition of the renamed holiday. "Farmworkers are the backbone of California," Newsom said. The Democratic governor went on to note more than one-third of the nation's farmworkers live in California, which produces one-third of America's vegetables and almost two-thirds of its fruits and nuts. He credited farmworkers for helping California become the world's fourth-largest economy.

Earlier this month, the Arizona Governor's Office commented on Chávez.

"The Governor’s Office is deeply concerned by the troubling allegations against César Chávez," Hobbs' Press Secretary Liliana Soto said. "As a social worker who worked with homeless youth and victims of domestic violence, Governor Hobbs takes allegations of inappropriate sexual behavior against women and minors very seriously. The Governor’s Office has decided to not recognize César Chávez Day this year."

On Monday, the Arizona state House approved the emergency holiday repeal measure HB 2072 by a vote of 48-8.

“The deeply troubling and reprehensible reports of sexual abuse brought forward by Dolores Huerta and others have made today’s vote necessary,” said Rep. Mariana Sandoval, D-23rd District, on the House floor. “I want to begin by recognizing the extraordinary courage by the survivors who have come forward with decades of silence … I want to reiterate that no one person makes a movement, the values that make us cannot be weakened nor divided by one person.”

The statewide move in Arizona comes amid widespread repeals in the U.S. of holidays and infrastructure in Chávez’s honor, most notably in the Southwest. Elsewhere, Seattle Mayor Katie Wilson said Cesar Chávez Park would be renamed, and Minnesota legislators repealed the holiday. Gov. Tim Walz, who signed the bill, declared Tuesday to be Farmworkers Day.

Unlike other name changes in reaction to the allegations against Chávez, the Arizona Legislature has fully repealed the holiday. The Phoenix City Council last week voted to rename César Chávez Day as Farmworkers Day.

Chávez, who was born in Yuma, Ariz., was widely considered a champion of Latino and farmworker rights during the 1960s and '70s. Chávez led the farmworkers’ rights movement in California at the time, which famously included the 1,000-Mile March by the UFW.

The UFW movement Chávez led came in reaction to what labor leaders called low living standards and second-class citizen treatment for immigrants and farmworkers in California. The movement helped to win support for the Golden State's Agricultural Labor Relations Act of 1975, giving farmworkers the right to collective bargaining.

But even before the rape allegations, Chávez's legacy ran into complications. Some objected to Chávez for not promoting the same labor protections for illegal immigrants or fully acknowledging the prevalence of Filipino farmworkers who protested alongside him. The revelations this month came from a years-long New York Times investigation that detailed allegations that Chávez raped two minors and Huerta.

“I am disappointed that this measure does not include the proposal put forward by our Senate Democratic colleagues to replace the holiday with Farmworkers Day,” Rep. Sandoval said on the Arizona House floor. “Failing to recognize, honor and uplift the voices of workers who feed this nation and to confront the exploitation they often endure misses an important opportunity to unite us around our shared values as a state … As Dolored Huerta coined, sí se puede.”

The term "sí se puede" or "yes, it can be done," was closely associated with the farmworkers movement led by Chávez, but was originally coined by Huerta.

Latino rights groups have widely denounced Chávez, who died in 1993. Pedro Hernandez, California state program director for GreenLatinos, a Latino-led nonprofit for environmental issues with chapters in California, Colorado, New Mexico, Texas and Illinois told The Center Square earlier this month that the revelations about Chávez could cause positive changes.

“As long as the process is community-informed and continues to uphold that it was a farmworker movement and there was more than an individual contributing to this, then I think we have a really interesting opportunity to change the narrative from a cult of personality to more of a people's history and a people's narrative,” said Hernandez.